But this post needs a response.
I am one of the two people who have strongly advocated the ExpoDisc
here (the other is LeeBase, and sometimes Wild-Mike after much
convincing!). Through my exploration of the ExpoDisc, I
corresponded on two occasions with Diane Wallace, the owner who I
had never previously met or talked with. I haven't spoken with her
since. I wrote of the device because I truly believe in it, as did
Lee. Though I have never met Lee or Mike, I feel darn comfortable
that none of us, nor anybody else represents the company in any
way or receives any benefit from our recommendations. I paid for
my ONE ExpoDisc just like anybody did.
ExpoDisc appears to be an old time, honorable company. When they
want to speak in this forum, which is rarely, they do it by signing
their name. They don't deserve to have their company smeared on
the forum no matter how expensive people think their product is.
Furthermore, many people on this forum recommend, sometimes
passionately, equipment/software that they like with absolutely no
commercial benefit to themselves.
I have been a contributing member of the forum since almost the
beginning of the 300D board, and before that the Olympus SLR board.
In this time I have never seen a more bizarre or commercial episode
than what happened with Michael Soo. His commercial behavior really
annoyed some members of the forum (see Gizmoboy's posts of late).
I, like others, have always learned a lot from Michael. He has a
very nice style in his photographs and was a longstanding
contributer. However, something very odd happened recently that I
just can't figure out.
in June he produced and began to push heavily his sharpening
actions. After a month or so he started charging for it and several
other actions in a rather awkward way (a fact that he himself later
referred to) and continued to mention/refer to them in many/most of
his posts.
Most recently several people started marvelling over them. It
quickly became apparent that these were, in fact, the same person
with alternate identities/pseudonyms (perhaps, some speculate,
Michael himself) who was holding discussions in threads with
himself/herself, praising the actions. Michael claimed, in a now
removed thread, that this was the work of a friend who was a
marketeer and bet him that he couldn't make $1,000 off his actions.
Whether it was Michael himself, or his friend, the shill, there
were a bunch of threads containing this promotional stuff on
multiple forums.
Finally, he posted the "contest" in which people were suppposed to
use up to three of his actions (at $10 each, $25 for the set) to
edit a photo. Any other editing wasn't allowed - just his actions.
After the blatant advertising aspects of his contest were pointed
out to him, he asked Phil to pull the thread. However, Michael
continued to explain the rules of the contest on the Nikon forum in
several more posts.
The commercial nature of these threads was repeatedly pointed out
to him, but afterwards he just created new approaches.
In the middle of all this he stopped posting, as did his shills.
Some of these threads vanished. It appears he (and they) were
banned by Phil. As for his motivation for this - not "financial
straits."
Iin his words, with the subject "Money Talks":
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess I'm selling my Photoshop actions to make some money to pay
for a 1D Mark II.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
